Australia’s expenditure on defence is set to hit $117 billion over the next decade after Jim Chalmers announced an additional $14 billion in last month’s budget, but critics have warned the government is overly focused on weapons systems and needs to address an urgent shortfall in service personnel.
Officially, Australia’s defence strategy is framed around preparedness, resilience, and deterrence. This includes additional expenditure of $14 billion over the next four years and $53 billion in the next decade.
Total additional defence investment since 2024 is projected to reach $117 billion by 2035-36, with major funding priorities including the AUKUS submarines programme, long-range missiles, drones, cyber capability, and air and missile defence systems.
But critics warn a lack of investment in military personnel will take years to increase and make sustainable, threatening Australia’s defence build-up and adding to pressure on defence personnel. At the same time, analysts predict workforce growth will struggle to keep pace with Australia’s expanding strategic ambitions, particularly across specialised operational and technical roles.
Defence Minister Richard Marles has repeatedly described long-term strategy as necessary to prepare Australia for increasing regional instability, particularly across the Indo-Pacific. However, much of the public discussion surrounding the May 12 budget focused on capability acquisition and strategic deterrence, while workforce sustainability, retention pressures, and family support systems received little attention.
Capability dollars and people dollars are not interchangeable in the short term.
John Blackburn
“There is a hard limit to how quickly a defence force can be grown whilst concurrently maintaining operations,” former Royal Australian Air Force deputy chief air vice-marshal John Blackburn told Central News.
“Politicians often underestimate how long it takes to train specialised defence personnel and how dependent that process is on instructors, facilities and operational resources.
“Capability dollars and people dollars are not interchangeable in the short term.”
Blackburn said the broader structural pressures surrounding workforce expansion remain underestimated, adding defence must balance recruitment expansion, current operational commitments, and future workforce development simultaneously. Instructors are usually drawn directly from operational units, meaning every experienced member reassigned into training reduced immediate operational capability elsewhere.
“Housing, childcare, partner employment and mental health support are not peripheral welfare issues — they are operational enablers,” Blackburn said.
“The strategic timeline may outrun the defence workforce system’s ability to deliver the people required to sustain it.”
Australian troops on an exercise in central Queensland. Photo: DVIDSHUB/FLICKR
Chalmers has described the defence investment as “the largest peacetime increase in defence spending in our nation’s history,” with defence portfolio funding projected to reach approximately $887 billion by 2035–36. The budget also included more than $770 million tied to recommendations from the Royal Commission into Defence and Veteran Suicide.
The funding heavily prioritises advanced military capability, including submarines, drones, missile defence systems, cyber security infrastructure, and emerging technologies designed to strengthen Australia’s position amid growing instability across the Indo-Pacific region.
In April Australia’s National Defence Strategy and Integrated Investment Program outlined one of the largest long-term military investments in modern Australian history. The Albanese government announced an additional $14 billion over the next four years and $63 billion over the next decade, bringing total additional defence investment since 2024 to $117 billion by 2035–36.
Yet, while the Australian Defence Force has repeatedly stated “people are Defence’s most important capability”, growing workforce shortages, retention difficulties, training pressures, and strain on military families continue to raise questions about whether Australia’s long-term defence ambitions can realistically be sustained under the current workforce system.
The 2026 strategy aims to expand the Defence workforce from approximately 61,000 personnel to around 69,000 by the early 2030s, with broader long-term goals of eventually reaching between 80,000 and 100,000 uniformed and public service personnel by 2040. Recruitment figures from 2024–25 were presented as evidence that the recovery strategy is improving, with more than 7,000 enlistments and reduced separation rates.
However, recruitment numbers alone reveal only part of the picture.
Expanding military capability does not simply require more recruits. It requires instructors, specialist schools, simulators, cyber clearances, operational placements, sea training, flying hours, and years of technical development.
Unlike many civilian industries, defence cannot rapidly create experienced personnel. Submariners, intelligence specialists, senior non-commissioned officers, cyber operators, and fast-jet pilots often require years of continuous operational and technical training before becoming fully qualified.
The rapid expansion of advanced technology may also increase workforce pressure rather than reduce it. While political messaging frequently presents drones, cyber systems, and uncrewed technologies as force multipliers, these systems still require highly specialised operators, analysts, engineers, intelligence personnel, and technical maintainers.
In many cases, emerging technologies create entirely new workforce categories before reducing older ones.
While technological expansion is frequently framed politically as strengthening Australia’s future defence capability, questions remain surrounding how workforce adaptation and long-term personnel sustainability are discussed publicly.
Chief political commentator for The Sydney Morning Herald and The Age, James Massola, said public discussion surrounding defence budgets often focused heavily on weaponry, cyber capability and strategic competition, while the workforce pressures required to sustain those systems received comparatively less.
“There’s very much a strong focus in recent budgets on how much additional money the federal government is allocating for submarines, missile technology, and broader capability expansion,” Massola said.
There’s not enough focus on recruiting, but we’re also continuing to see struggles around meeting recruitment targets and sustaining personnel long term.
James Massola
While recruitment targets are frequently highlighted politically, Massola noted that the practical realities of maintaining and adapting a highly specialised workforce remain an ongoing challenge across defence sectors.
“The challenge of keeping people up-to-date, getting used to these systems… that’s not something we hear being talked about in defence and that’s a challenge for people and should probably be discussed,” he added.
“There’s not enough focus on recruiting, but we’re also continuing to see struggles around meeting recruitment targets and sustaining personnel long term.”
Beyond operational capability, the human impact on defence families continues to shape morale and long term retention.
Frequent relocations, deployment cycles, childcare responsibilities, disrupted careers for partners, and prolonged separation continue to place significant pressure on households. Although the 2026 budget included funding for continuation bonuses, reserve expansion, housing support, and mental health programs, critics argue these measures may not fully address the long-term realities of military life.
The Royal Commission into Defence and Veteran Suicide further intensified scrutiny surrounding Defence culture, institutional support systems, and long term wellbeing across the serving and veteran community.
While Defence planning documents frequently describe mental health risks as manageable, the Royal Commission highlighted how prolonged exposure to trauma, stress, operational instability, and administrative complexity can affect large sections of the defence community.
Veteran compensation reform also forms part of the 2026 transition. From July 2026, the Veterans’ Entitlements Act 1986 and the Defence-related claims framework under the Safety, Rehabilitation and Compensation Act will close to new claims, with compensation systems consolidated under an updated Military Rehabilitation and Compensation Act 2004.
The reforms are intended to simplify claims processes and improve support pathways for veterans, particularly regarding treatment injuries, service-related conditions, and long-standing compensation disputes. Additional funding has also been allocated toward counselling and veteran advocacy programs through organisations including Open Arms and Safe Zone Support.
Despite the scale of the investment, Blackburn remains sceptical that the broader strategy adequately addresses the deeper structural pressures affecting defence personnel.
“I have little confidence in the 2026 National Defence Strategy, and doubt if the important issues raised have been adequately addressed,” Blackburn said.
Main image of Australian military personnel by US Pacific Fleet/Flikr.
